U.S. Supreme Court Puts Limits on Police Power to Seize Private Property

Re:U.S. Supreme Court Puts Limits on Police Power to Seize P... by MFLoon on Wednesday February 20, 2019 @04:26PM (#19212159)

That's just not true. Corporations have been recognized as legal persons in the US for well over a century prior to Citizens United, in both judicial precedent and federal statutes.

I agree with what I assume you believe - that this ought not be the case, and corporations should be more restricted in their rights than natural persons. But simply claiming it to be so is willful ignorance.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. Supreme Court Puts Limits on Police Power to Seize P... by slavik81 on Wednesday February 20, 2019 @08:52PM (#19213874)

The legal fiction of corporate personhood does not grant them all the rights of a natural person. For example, in SCC Acquisitions, Inc. v. Superior Court, the California Court of Appeal ruled that corporations did not have a constitutional right to privacy, despite the California constitution extending privacy rights to all people.

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/court-holds-corporation...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. Supreme Court Puts Limits on Police Power to Seize P... by BurningFrog on Wednesday February 20, 2019 @11:28PM (#19214540)

Corporations are "legal persons" in the sense that the same rules apply to them as to people in some areas where that makes sense.

This is mostly a practical matter, so instead of writing a duplicate set of laws for corporations and people, the legislators have said that "for these laws, just apply laws to corporations as you would to people".

...or that's how I've had it explained to me.

[ Parent | on HN ]